CHAPTER IV.
ACCOUNTS OF LÂO-DZE AND KWANG-DZE GIVEN BY SZE-MÂ KHIEN.
It seems desirable, before passing from Lâo, and Kwang in this
Introduction, to give a place in it to what is said about them
by Sze-mâ Khien. I have said that not a single proper name occurs
in the Tâo Teh King. There is hardly an historical allusion in
it. Only one chapter, the twentieth, has somewhat of an autobiographical
character. It tells us, however, of no incidents of his life.
He appears alone in the world through his cultivation of the Tâo,
melancholy and misunderstood, yet binding that Tâo more closely
to his bosom.
The Books of Kwang-dze are of a different nature, abounding in
pictures of Tâoist life, in anecdotes and narratives, graphic,
argumentative, often satirical. But they are not historical. Confucius
and many of his disciples, Lâo and members of his school, heroes
and sages of antiquity, and men of his own day, move across his
pages; but the incidents in connexion with which they are introduced
are probably fictitious, and devised by him 'to point his moral
or adorn his tale.' His names of individuals and places are often
like those of Bunyan in his Pilgrim's Progress or his Holy War,
emblematic of their characters and the doctrines which he employs
them to illustrate. He often comes on
the stage himself, and there is an air of verisimilitude in his
descriptions, possibly also a certain amount of fact about them;
but we cannot appeal to them as historical testimony. It is only
to Sze-mâ Khien that we can go for this; he always writes in the
spirit of an historian; but what he has to tell us of the two
men is not much.
And first, as to his account of Lâo-dze. When he wrote, about
the beginning of the first century B.C., the Tâoist master was
already known as Lâo-dze. Khien, however, tells us that his surname
was Lî, and his name R, meaning 'Ear,' which gave place
after his death to Tan, meaning 'Long-eared,' from which we may
conclude that he was named from some peculiarity in the form of
his ears. He was a native of the state of Khû, which had then
extended far beyond its original limits, and his birth-place was
in the present province of Ho-nan or of An-hui. He was a curator
in the Royal Library; and when Confucius visited the capital in
the year B.C. 517, the two men met. Khien says that Confucius's
visit to Lo-yang was that he might question Lâo on the subject
of ceremonies. He might have other objects in mind as well; but
however that was, the two met. Lî said to Khung, 'The men about
whom you talk are dead, and their bones are mouldered to dust;
only their words are left. Moreover, when the superior man gets
his opportunity, he mounts aloft; but when the time is against
him, he is carried along by the force of circumstances. I have heard that a good merchant, though he have
rich treasures safely stored, appears as if he were poor; and
that the superior man, though his virtue be complete, is yet to
outward seeming stupid. Put away your proud air and many desires,
your insinuating habit and wild will. They are of no advantage
to you;—this is all I have to tell you.' Confucius is made
to say to his disciples after the interview: 'I know how
birds can fly, fishes swim, and animals run. But the runner may
be snared, the swimmer hooked, and the flyer shot by the arrow.
But there is the dragon:—I cannot tell how he mounts on
the wind through the clouds, and rises to heaven. To-day I have
seen Lâo-dze, and can only compare him to the dragon.'
In this speech of Confucius we have, I believe, the origin of
the name Lâo-dze, as applied to the master of Tâoism. Its meaning
is 'The Old Philosopher,' or 'The Old Gentleman.' Confucius might well so style Lî R. At the
time of this interview he was himself in his thirty-fifth year,
and the other was in his eighty-eighth. Khien adds, 'Lâo-dze cultivated
the Tâo and its attributes, the chief aim of his studies being
how to keep himself concealed and remain unknown. He continued
to reside at (the capital of) Kâu, but after a long time, seeing
the decay of the dynasty, he left it and went away to the barrier-gate,
leading out of the kingdom on the north-west. Yin Hsî, the warden
of the gate, said to him, "You are about to withdraw yourself
out of sight. Let me insist on your (first) composing for me a
book." On this, Lâo-dze wrote a book in two parts, setting forth
his views on the Tâo and its attributes, in more than 5000 characters.
He then went away, and it is not known where he died. He was a
superior man, who liked to keep himself unknown.'
Khien finally traces Lâo's descendants down to the first century
B.C., and concludes by saying, 'Those who attach themselves to
the doctrine of Lâo-dze condemn that of the Literati, and the
Literati on their part condemn Lâo-dze, verifying the saying,
"Parties whose principles are different cannot take counsel together."
Lî R taught that by doing nothing others are as a matter
of course transformed, and that rectification
in the same way ensues from being pure and still.'
This morsel is all that we have of historical narrative about
Lâo-dze. The account of the writing of the Tâo Teh King at the
request of the warden of the barrier-gate has a doubtful and legendary
appearance. Otherwise, the record is free from anything to raise
suspicion about it. It says nothing about previous existences
of Lâo, and nothing of his travelling to the west, and learning
there the doctrines which are embodied in his work. He goes through
the pass out of the domain of Kâu, and died no one knowing where.
It is difficult, however, to reconcile this last statement with
a narrative in the end of Kwang-dze's third Book. There we see
Lâo-dze dead, and a crowd of mourners wailing round the corpse,
and giving extraordinary demonstrations of grief, which offend
a disciple of a higher order, who has gone to the house to offer
his condolences on the occasion. But for the peculiar nature of
most of Kwang's narratives, we should say, in opposition to Khien,
that the place and time of Lâo's death were well known. Possibly,
however, Kwang-dze may have invented the whole story, to give
him the opportunity of setting forth what, according to his ideal
of it, the life of a Tâoist master should be, and how even Lâo-dze
himself fell short of it.
Second, Khien's account of Kwang-dze is still more brief. He was
a native, he tells us, of the territory of Mäng, which belonged
to the kingdom of Liang or Wei, and held an office, he does not
say what, in the city of Khî-yüan. Kwang was thus of the same
part of China as Lâo-dze, and probably grew up familiar with all
his speculations and lessons. He lived during the reigns of the
kings Hui of Liang, Hsüan of Khî, and Wei of Khû. We cannot be
wrong therefore in assigning his period to the latter half of
the third, and earlier part of the fourth century B. C. He was
thus a contemporary of Mencius. They visited at the same courts,
and yet neither ever mentions the other. They were the two ablest
debaters of their day, and fond of exposing what they deemed heresy.
But it would only be a matter of useless
speculation to try to account for their never having come into
argumentative collision.
Khien says: 'Kwang had made himself well acquainted with all the
literature of his time, but preferred the views of Lâo-dze, and
ranked himself among his followers, so that of the more than ten
myriads of characters contained in his published writings the
greater part are occupied with metaphorical illustrations of Lâo's
doctrines. He made "The Old Fisherman," "The Robber Kih," and
"The Cutting open Satchels," to satirize and expose the disciples
of Confucius, and clearly exhibit the sentiments of Lâo. Such
names and characters as "Wei-lêi Hsü" and "Khang-sang Dze" are
fictitious, and the pieces where they occur are not to be understood
as narratives of real events.
'But Kwang was an admirable writer and skilful composer, and by
his instances and truthful descriptions hit and exposed the Mohists
and Literati. The ablest scholars of his day could not escape
his satire nor reply to it, while he allowed and enjoyed himself
with his sparkling, dashing style; and thus it was that the greatest
men, even kings and princes, could not use him for their purposes.
'King Wei of Khû, having heard of the ability of Kwang Kâu, sent
messengers with large gifts to bring him to his court, and promising
also that he would make him his chief minister. Kwang-dze, however,
only laughed and said to them, "A thousand ounces of silver are
a great gain to me, and to be a high noble and minister is a most
honourable position. But have you not seen the victim-ox for the
border sacrifice? It is carefully fed for several years, and robed
with rich embroidery that it may be fit to enter the Grand Temple.
When the time comes for it to do so, it would prefer to be a little
pig, but it cannot get to be so. Go away quickly, and do not soil
me with your presence. I had rather amuse
and enjoy myself in the midst of a filthy ditch than be subject
to the rules and restrictions in the court of a sovereign. 1 have
determined never to take office, but prefer the enjoyment of my
own free will."'
Khien concludes his account of Kwang-dze with the above story,
condensed by him, probably, from two of Kwang's own narratives,
in par. 11 of Bk. XVII, and 13 of XXXII, to the injury of them
both. Paragraph 14 of XXXII brings before us one of the last scenes
of Kwang-dze's life, and we may. doubt whether it should be received
as from his own pencil. It is interesting in itself, however,
and I introduce it here: 'When Kwang-dze was about to die, his
disciples signified their wish to give him a grand burial. "I
shall have heaven and earth," he said, "for my coffin and its
shell; the sun and moon for my two round symbols of jade; the
stars and constellations for my pearls and jewels;—will
not the provisions for my interment be complete? What would you
add to them?" The disciples replied, "We are afraid that the crows
and kites will eat our master." Kwang-dze rejoined, "Above, the
crows and kites will eat me; below, the mole-crickets and ants
will eat me; to take from those and give to these would only show
your partiality."
Such were among the last words of Kwang-dze. His end was not so
impressive as that of Confucius; but it was in keeping with the
general magniloquence and strong assertion of independence that
marked all his course.
1
Julien translates this by 'il erre à l'aventure.' In 1861 I rendered
it, 'He moves as if his feet were entangled.' To one critic it
suggests the idea of a bundle or wisp of brushwood rolled about
over the ground by the wind.
2
The characters may mean 'the old boy,' and so understood have
given rise to various fabulous legends; that his mother had carried
him in her womb for seventy-two years (some say, for eighty-one),
and that when born the child had the white hair of an old man.
Julien has translated the fabulous legend of Ko Hung of our fourth
century about him. By that time the legends of Buddhism about
Sâkyamuni had become current in China, and were copied and applied
to Lao-dze by his followers. Looking at the meaning of the two
names, I am surprised no one has characterized Lao-dze as the
Chinese Seneca.
3
Khang-sang Dze is evidently the Käng-sang Khû of Kwang's Book
XXIII. Wei-lêi Hsü is supposed by Sze-ma Käng of the Thang dynasty,
who called himself the Lesser Sze-mâ, to be the name of a Book;
one, in that case, of the lost books of Kwang. But as we find
the 'Hill of Wei-lêi' mentioned in Bk. XXIII as the scene of Käng-sang
Khû's Tâoistic labours and success, I suppose that Khien's reference
is to that. The names are quoted by him from memory, or might
be insisted on as instances of different readings.
|